Yes, so look for Barry & his thugs to ram through cap & trade and other taxes. Can you say $10 a gallon for gas. Of course Barry will say it’s for the greater good. Bullshit to that. Start your own lobby. Lobby for new people to get rid of these *sswipes.

izoneguy on May 7, 2009 at 6:16 PM

Maybe a little OT, but I went to a meeting of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers last night in Boston, where they had a panel discussion touting the glories of solar and wind power, and how desperately (cough!) we need Cap&Trade, and how all the libs from Boston had to call Midwest Senators to tell them how horrible coal power was, and how they HAD to vote for Cap&Trade.

I publicly asked them a question about their approach toward nuclear power plants (which don’t emit CO2), but they hemmed and hawed and lamented “siting” problems where a company could spend billions designing a nuclear power plant, but have their plans cancelled by the whim of some State legislator. Wait a minute–if a company gets a State and Federal permit, isn’t that good enough?

They also lamented sending lots of petrodollars to foreign countries for oil imports, but then said that Cap&Trade would bring dollars to the American treasury. Maybe to the Government, but how does that reduce oil imports? We only get 3% of our electricity from oil, but we import it mostly for transportation and home-heating–do they want to cap and trade gasoline and home-heating oil–in effect rationing our driving and the temperature of our homes?

I also asked them a question about shale oil, since we have enough to last over 100 years of imports, in order to give ourselves more time to develop alternative energy. No, they said, you can’t do that, because you’ll cook the planet and have a Type II climate change where glaciers will melt so rapidly they’ll change the Gulf Stream, according to the IPCC, and sea levels might rise 60 cm (about two feet) in 100 years. The IPCC, the ones who wrote the conclusions before examining the data! Hmmm…couldn’t people build a sea-wall two feet high in 100 years? Is that so hard?

Except that the Greenland ice cap is growing thicker in the middle, and the East Antarctica ice cap is growing and getting colder, but no matter to the panelists. We’ve got to react to “global warming” like we did to Pearl Harbor, they say, and ration everything to save, not the free world, but ICE.

This is what we’re up against, and what they’re telling ENGINEERS, who should know better! Hopefully, cooler heads will prevail in the Senate, but you never know…

Stupid: $17 billion is a lot of money outside D.C., says Obama
Ed crunched the numbers
on Obama’s ridiculous budget cuts this morning but I thought you’d
enjoy video of The One insisting, with all apparent sincerity,……

Obama also would eliminate new spending to buy advanced-generation sensors to detect nuclear bombs or radioactive materials at U.S. ports and borders, a Bush priority that has had technical problems.

The democrats screamed like he!! about port security (but securing the boarders somehow did not matter) for years and now they are proposing to cut it.

This should get more attention.

Yes, so look for Barry & his thugs to ram through cap & trade and other taxes. Can you say $10 a gallon for gas
izoneguy on May 7, 2009 at 6:16 PM

This idiotic increase in the cost of energy by the democrats
is going to be especially damaging as other countries economies get going again,thus raising gas prices at the same time they are pushing for higher energy prices.

I hear the liberals rant on about how raising gas prices is beneficial because it makes people more disciplined in their energy consumption which makes it better for the environment.

How come this argument does not work for HEALTH CARE?

Why doesn’t allowing health care costs to rise make people want to take better care of their bodies and not abuse the health care system?

Is this just more idiotic liberal pretzel logic?

If getting “free” health care or drastically reduced rates is better for the populace and the economy, how come using our own resources and reducing or getting “free” energy is not just as beneficial to improving our living conditions.

$537.50 is a TON of cash for tennis shoes!!

That’s like saving a nickel when you’re spending $100.

but ya see what I did there, the way to make it stop stinkin is to eliminate the source, not whiff the 1/10th of 1% and congratulate yourself.

http://www.tellyourneighbor.com/icaucus/invite/

sigh.

Apparently numbers are only important when the tell the story he wants to tell.

imagine a family that’s already deeply in debt realizing they’re on pace to spend $50,000 this year — and “scaling back” by foregoing one $250 purchase.

AP – this is not the right analogy. It’s more like that same $50,000 per year family announcing that for the next 8 years they were going to spend $230,000 per year – but proudly stressing that they were NOT,NOT,NOT staying at Walt Disney’s Grand Floridian on vacation this year.

Those [$17 billion a year] savings are far exceeded by a 2 1/2-inch thick volume detailing Obama’s generous increases for domestic programs. And instead of devoting the savings to defray record deficits, the White House is funneling them back into other programs.

Just think how much more he could have saved by vetoing the “stimulus” bill.

If you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you.

Tav on May 7, 2009 at 6:18 PM

Gaze long enough into the abyss and the edge will crumble.
Its not the abyss gazing back at you, you’re getting closer.
Stupid sh!t is, as stupid sh!t dooooeeeessssss